January 12, 2009


RE: $1 billion dollar cut in the budget in prisoner and parolee cost.


Dear Governor Schwarzenegger;

Part of your efforts to reduce the budget involves eliminating all “non serious, non violent and non-sex
offenders” from being under supervised parole.
Department of Finance Director Mike Genest says your proposal will be structured in such a way to
protect public safety.
I’m not sure that this proposal does not put the public at greater risk.

According to Lance Corcoran the current definitions of “serious” and “violent” felonies exclude crimes
such as, “spousal abuse, stalking and possession of destructive devices”. And that offenders convicted
under those laws would not be subject to parole supervision.
Is this is a possibility?

Let’s start with spousal abuse. We know how difficult for a man or a woman to summon the courage to
report such a crime considering the systems general lack of support, the shame, and the fear of
retaliation among other reasons. And it will be made more difficult with the looming prospect with
people who are convicted allowed back on the streets without supervision. This would create less of an
incentive to report such a crime.
And as you know, parole already prematurely releases individuals that need to be supervised
The fear of going back to jail is maybe one of the benefits of continued supervision.  
Often the very fact of being watched forces one to consider the consequences of their actions.

Article from Ezine by Candis Reade “statistics on spousal abuse:
Domestic violence is the dirty, little secret that is a common thread weaved into the fabric of all
societies. It does not discriminate against race, religion, culture socioeconomic status or gender.
However, the victim in the majority of domestic violence cases is female. According to statistics on
spousal abuse, one-third to one-half of adult women have been abused by her spouse or significant
other. It is estimated that over half of the attacks on women are perpetrated by someone they know,
usually a husband or a boyfriend. Domestic violence is usually a response by the male in an effort to
control, physically, mentally and/or emotionally, his female partner.
The victim of spousal abuse generally lives in fear, intimidation and humiliation. Her abuser makes her a
captive in her own home and in her own life as the abuser exerts power and control over her. Because of
his manipulation and her isolation and lack of emotional support, the female becomes dependent on the
abuser for everything, including her identity. Statistics on spousal abuse indicate that once a victim is
isolated from her friends and family, the domestic violence becomes more intense. Types of domestic
violence include: physical abuse, verbal abuse, emotional abuse, sexual abuse, and economic deprivation.
Many victims of domestic violence find themselves isolated from family and friends and humiliated by
their situation. It stands to reason that many cases of domestic violence go unreported. Statistics on
spousal abuse demonstrate that the majority of women who are victims of abuse do not report these
occurrences to either their physician or anyone else. Some of the injuries are so severe that hospital
admission or serious treatment is required. In addition, the vast majority of these incidences are never
reported to the police. Abuse such as verbal and emotional abuse are not considered criminal acts, but
these types of abuses can, and many times do, lead to criminal behaviors, such as assault.
The common response to an issue of domestic violence is to wonder why the woman just does not
leave the abuser. As with any other relationship, there are many factors that affect a female’s decision
to stay with her abuser.
Spousal abuse is cyclical, and there are distinct phases to spousal abuse. The abuse begins as the male’s
frustrations and stresses build. According to spousal abuse statistics, more likely than not, the female
will continue to face abuse as long as she is with the abusive partner regardless of his promises to
change. Spousal abuse goes under-reported by female victims, and when the victim seeks medical help
only a small percentage of cases are reported as domestic violence cases. Spousal abuse is a persistent,
silent epidemic that affects millions of women each year.
Won’t your new budget proposal compound the situation making more victims less likely to report
these crimes? Yes, less people would be incarcerated but it’s unlikely there will be less victims.

Now let’s address “Stalking” which I, unfortunately, have direct personal experience with.
According to your proposal this too is a “non serious” crime which would require neither parole nor
supervision upon offenders release.
Below are excerpts of a letter I wrote to you, your office responded to this issue immediately via
telephone. I was told that safety of citizens was at the top of your agenda.

         May 18th 2007
Re: Civil Rights and Legislation
Dear:
Governor Schwarzenegger

Civil rights are the protections and privileges of personal power given to all citizens by law.
Penal Code Section 646.9. Stalking. 1990. Amended 2002.
(a)        Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or willfully and maliciously
harasses another person and who makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in
reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of his or her immediate family is guilty of the crime of
stalking, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or by a fine of not
more than one thousand dollars ($ 1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment
in the state prison.
(b) Any person who violates subdivision (a) when there is a temporary restraining order, injunction, or
any other court order in effect prohibiting the behavior described in subdivision (a) against the same
party, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years.
(c)(1) Every person who, after having been convicted of a felony under Section 273.5, 273.6, or 422,
commits a violation of subdivision (a) shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for not more
than one year, or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($ 1,000), or by both that fine and
imprisonment, or by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or five years.
(2) Every person who, after having been convicted of a felony under subdivision (a), commits a
violation of this section shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or five
years.
(d) In addition to the penalties provided in this section, the sentencing court may order a person
convicted of a felony under this section to register as a sex offender pursuant to subparagraph (E) of
paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 290.
(e) For the purposes of this section, "harasses" means engages in a knowing and willful course of
conduct directed at a specific person that seriously alarms, annoys, torments, or terrorizes the person,
and that serves no legitimate purpose.
(f) For the purposes of this section, "course of conduct" means two or more acts occurring over a
period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose. Constitutionally protected activity
is not included within the meaning of "course of conduct."

The aforementioned is in regard to my case which I can validate with restraining orders, police records,
court records and case numbers, etc.

For approximately 3 years I have been battling with the State in order to protect myself and my loved
ones from a certifiably dangerous stalker.

I took several attempts just to get a restraining order and the judge almost denied me a continuance due
to the fact that my stalker, harasser and later the person who threatened to “murder” me in various
ways and kill my Investigating Officer, kept evading service.
Once receiving the so called “Protective Order” my stalker “XXXXX XXXX prison number X24160
kept up with the harassment, threats, etc. She was placed on more then one occasion in a mental
institution only to be released then brought up on misdemeanor charges only to be released again into
society.
22 days after her release from the Twin Towers in Los Angeles, Ms. XXXXXX started with the
stalking and deaths threats again.
Now, not only in violation of probation but also a “restraining order”. (Aforementioned law in regards
to this violation above)

Ms. XXXXX after several threats upon my life, my family and my lead detective Tammy Dougherty’s
life, was arrested and put into the Twin Towers.
During this time Yael Massery D.A. offered Ms. XXXXX the appropriate plea which was 2.5 years
State Prison and 3 Felonies. Ms XXXXX rejected this offer and after a few evaluations she was
sentenced to Patton State Institute until Ms. XXXX was competent to stand trial.
After approximately 14 months the State of California drugged Ms. XXXXX up enough to except a
plea.
We now have a new D.A. handed the case. His name is Paul Sergojan. Mr. Sergojan allowed Ms.
XXXXX a maximum of 16 months with 14 time served and only 1 felony if she takes the plea!
Ms. XXXXX took the plea and was released on the 23rd of April, 2007. Ms XXXXX never spent the
entire 16 months and she was released before the law allows. (See aforementioned Law)
         This is a violation of My Civil Rights!
         the protections and privileges of personal power given to all citizens by law.


I also filed a CDCR 1707 on March 23rd 2007 with the California Department of Corrections
requesting that I be notified when Ms. XXXXX was to be released and where she would be released.
As well I requested that Ms. XXXXX be paroled 35 miles outside the County of Los Angeles.
On April 23rd 2007 Ms. XXXXX was released only a few miles from my home… On May the 4th,
2007 I was notified by mail as to her release. Ms. XXXXX knows where my P.O. Box is. She has
committed a few crimes there which she was never held accountable for. My point being, due to the
failure of communication in our system, Ms. XXXXX the person who wishes to disembowel me may
have followed me from my P.O. Box and now may be aware of my new place of residence. Once again a
failure in the system communications and a violation of My Civil Rights.
         the protections and privileges of personal power given to all citizens by law.

The story is much more detailed and traumatizing then this letter could ever allow you to imagine.
The victim who has just as many “Civil Rights” as the criminal, yet the criminal actually has more! This
needs to be changed.
I would also like to know your ideas on how we can strengthen the Stalking Laws so not one more
person ends up with a toe tag or suffers emotional rape, physical and/or psychological scaring?. And
how can we make sure that piece of paper titled a “Protection Order” is really effective? Because mine
wasn’t for a long time and I don’t believe it is to this day.

Stalking is far more common then most people imagined and never mentioned, it is emotional rape and
people don’t openly talk about it and in many cases they won’t report it because like rape, they know
that they will treated unfairly and be dragged through the mud and nothing will come of it in regards to
their Civil Rights. (Attached is a new article on stalking in America)


This is just one piece of evidence that proves what a mistake it is to eliminate parole for these types of
offenders.
Yes, I’m all too aware the parole office is understaffed; budget cuts can not be made there.
A week after my stalker was released from parole she resumed stalking me again.

On December 15th 2008 I had to go through the same red tape all over again, prove up my case reliving
the emotional trauma and stress just to be granted a rather feeble last line of defense, a “restraining
order” against a diagnosed criminally insane woman who is now unsupervised.

Below is only a partial list of statistics and are outdated the actual statistics are much higher:

         Stalking Facts:
• 1,006,970 women and 370,990 men are stalked annually in the U.S.
• 1 in 12 women and 1 in 45 men will be stalked in their lifetime.
• 77% of female victims and 64% of male victims know their stalker.
• 87% of stalkers are men.
• 81% of women stalked by a current or former intimate partner are also
physically assaulted by that partner.
• The average duration of stalking is 1.8 years, but increases to 2.2 years
when involving intimate partners.
Profile of a Stalker:
• 2/3 of stalkers pursue their victims at least once per week, many daily,
using more than one method.
• 78% of stalkers use more than one means of approach.
• Weapons are used to harm or threaten victims in 1 out of 5 cases.
• Almost 1/3 of stalkers have stalked before.
Intimate Partner Femicide:
• 76% of intimate partner femicide (murder) victims had been stalked by
their intimate partner.
• 89% of femicide victims who had been physically abused had also been
stalked in the 12 months before the murder.
• 54% of femicide victims reported stalking to the police before they were
killed by their stalkers.


Lastly, “destructive devices”.

A destructive device is a firearm or explosive device that, in the United States, is regulated by the
National Firearms Act of 1934. Examples of destructive devices are grenades, and firearms with a bore
over one half of an inch, including some semi-automatic shotguns. While current federal laws allow
destructive devices, some states have banned them from transfer to civilians, and only law enforcement
officers and military personnel are allowed to own them. 1934 (MCMXXXIV) was a common year
starting on Monday (link will take you to calendar). ...  Semi-automatic shotguns are a subclass of
shotgun that are able to fire a shell after every trigger pull, without any of the manual reloading typical
in most shotgun designs. ...

All National Firearms Act firearms including destructive devices, must be registered with the Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, who then closely monitor use, transport, and storage of the
items. ATF (BATFE) Seal The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is a United States
federal agency; more specifically a specialized law enforcement and regulatory organization within the
United States Department of Justice. ...

The definition of a "destructive device" is found in Title 26, United States Code, in section 5845(f). The
definition reads as follows: The United States Code (U.S.C.) is a compilation and codification of the
general and permanent federal law of the United States. ...
(1) any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas, (A) bomb, (B) grenade, (C) rocket having a propellant
charge of more than 4 ounces, (D) missile having an explosive charge of more than 1/4 ounce, (E) mine
or (F) similar device.
(2) Any weapon by whatever name known which will, or which may be readily converted to, expel a
projectile by the action of an explosive or other propellant, the barrel or barrels of which have a bore of
more than one-half inch in diameter, except a shotgun or shotgun shell which the Secretary finds is
generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes; and
(3) Any combination of parts either designed or intended for use in converting any device into a
destructive device as defined in subparagraphs (1) and (2) and from which a destructive device may be
readily assembled.

Do you believe that the people arrested with this type of weaponry have no intention of doing damage
and harm to not only civilians but also law enforcement? Do you really believe they are “reformed”?
Does not their unsupervised release put the citizens of the State of California at great risk? Is it even
possible to justify the unsupervised release of this type of offender?

I’m not against some reduction in sentences with the “completion of drug, vocational and educational
programs”.

However, I am concerned about programs offered to criminals that hard working tax paying citizens can’
t even afford?
Maybe this money should be allocated into the school system for drug prevention, vocational and
educational skills. This helps in the formation of aligning young adults into a positive, successful, crime
free future, doesn’t it?
Once again the scales appear a bit unbalanced.

Considering the economical crisis we as a nation face, the loss of jobs the foreclosures on homes, etc.
One can almost expect the so called “non serious” criminals to pick up right where they left off.

For one, they will not be employable considering people with degrees and experience whom haven’t
been arrested are losing their jobs daily and can’t find work.
The Employment Development Department is overwhelmed.
Unfortunately no one has found the magic wand to spin around our economy.
The cost of the repeat incarceration of these criminals must be measured against the cost of innocent
human suffering.

Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 1994 (these are the latest updates according to the Bureau of
Justice Statistics)
Reports on the re-arrest, reconviction, and re-incarceration of former inmates who were tracked for 3
years after their release from prisons in 15 States in 1994. The former inmates represent two-thirds of
all prisoners released in the United States that year. The report includes prisoner demographic
characteristics (gender, race, Hispanic origin, and age), criminal record, types of offenses for which they
were imprisoned, the effects of length of stay in prison on likelihood of re-arrest, and comparisons with
a study of prisoners released in 1983.
Highlights include the following:
•        Released prisoners with the highest re-arrest rates were robbers (70.2%), burglars (74.0%),
larcenists (74.6%), motor vehicle thieves (78.8%), those in prison for possessing or selling stolen
property (77.4%), and those in prison for possessing, using, or selling illegal weapons (70.2%).
•        Within 3 years, 2.5% of released rapists were arrested for another rape, and 1.2% of those who
had served time for homicide were arrested for homicide.
•        The 272,111 offenders discharged in 1994 had accumulated 4.1 million arrest charges before their
most recent imprisonment and another 744,000 charges within 3 years of release.

These facts demonstrate:
These criminals are more than likely to repeat offend.
The cost to the tax paying citizen will be monumental.
Insurance rates will sky-rocket taxes will be raised due to crime increase.
The victims will now be prisoners in their own homes in fear of their defendant retaliating and under no
supervision.
Innocent lives will certainly be lost.
I hope you reconsider making these particular budget cuts and find somewhere else to make up for the
deficit of our State.
Lastly, it is fact that non violent crime leads to violent crime…
Let your legacy be the sense of well being and security you have created for the people of this great
state. I believe you are the man that can do this.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely
Iva Franks-Singer (victims rights advocate)
Open Letter to Governor Schwarzenegger
addressing the danger and cost of his budget cuts
for 2009
This letter was mailed to the Governor's office Jan 10th 2009 with no response...
If you don't
know your
rights, you don't
have any.